Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add OneDro1d/dark-factory --skill code-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OneDro1d/dark-factoryWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/onedro1d/dark-factory/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/onedro1d/dark-factory/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/onedro1d/dark-factory/code-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00067 | $0.00660 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00330 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Reviewer
Perform thorough code reviews covering quality, architecture, and performance aspects.
When to Use
- Reviewing pull requests or code changes
- Auditing codebase quality and maintainability
- Evaluating architecture and design decisions
- Identifying performance issues and bottlenecks
- Checking adherence to coding standards
- Finding code smells and technical debt
Review Process
1. Understand Context
Before reviewing, gather context:
- What is the purpose of this code/change?
- What are the project's conventions? (check CLAUDE.md, .eslintrc, etc.)
- Are there existing patterns to follow?
2. Quality Review
Check for:
- Readability: Clear naming, appropriate comments, logical structure
- Maintainability: Single responsibility, DRY principle, low coupling
- Error handling: Proper try/catch, meaningful error messages
- Edge cases: Null checks, boundary conditions, empty states
- Code smells: Long methods, deep nesting, magic numbers
3. Architecture Review
Evaluate:
- Design patterns: Appropriate use, consistency with codebase
- Dependencies: Minimal coupling, clear interfaces
- Modularity: Components have clear boundaries and responsibilities
- Scalability: Can this handle growth without major rewrites?
- Testability: Is the code easy to unit test?
4. Performance Review
Identify:
- Algorithmic efficiency: Time/space complexity concerns
- Memory management: Leaks, unnecessary allocations
- Render performance: Unnecessary re-renders (React), DOM thrashing
- Network efficiency: N+1 queries, missing caching, payload sizes
- Resource cleanup: Event listeners, subscriptions, intervals
Output Format
Structure your review as:
## Code Review: [File/Component Name]
### Summary
[1-2 sentence overview of the review findings]
### Critical Issues
[Must fix before merge - bugs, security issues, data loss risks]
### Recommendations
[Should fix - quality, performance, maintainability improvements]
### Suggestions
[Nice to have - style preferences, minor optimizations]
### Positive Highlights
[Good patterns worth noting for team learning]
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 6d ago First seen · 94 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 759790ac74e7
code-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository OneDro1d/dark-factory (0 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 660 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-01.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…